Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence
Background and Aims The biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2016-10, Vol.84 (4), p.709-716 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 716 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 709 |
container_title | Gastrointestinal endoscopy |
container_volume | 84 |
creator | Pohl, Heiko, MD Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH Mott, Leila A., MS Ahnen, Dennis J., MD Burke, Carol A., MD Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD Bresalier, Robert S., MD Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc |
description | Background and Aims The biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline colonoscopy. Methods Data were extracted from 3 adenoma prevention trials (n = 2430). Participants had at least 1 adenoma at baseline colonoscopy and underwent subsequent surveillance colonoscopy, at which time metachronous adenomas could be detected. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for metachronous adenomas by location of the baseline lesion and considered the impact of advanced neoplasia and multiplicity. Results At baseline, 522 patients (21.5%) had adenomas only in the proximal colon, 1266 patients (52.1%) had adenomas only in the distal colorectum, and 642 (26.4%) had adenomas in both regions. Overall, 877 patients (36.5%) had metachronous adenomas during the follow-up period. Those with only proximal adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous adenomas compared with patients with only distal adenomas (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01–1.35). A greater proximal risk was found after restricting the analysis to patients with multiple proximal adenomas versus multiple distal adenomas (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10–1.67). The risk of recurrent adenomas on the same side was 48% higher for patients with only proximal adenomas at baseline compared with those with only distal adenomas at baseline (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22–1.80). Conclusions Patients with proximal adenomas only have a modestly greater risk of adenoma recurrence than patients with adenomas limited to the distal colon, and have a greater likelihood of adenoma recurrence on the same side compared with patients with distal adenomas. This observation suggests that biological factors may differentially affect neoplasia growth across the colon. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.048 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5586081</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0016510716002716</els_id><sourcerecordid>1820596682</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-8520db6e134a927cec5a7a2993524be0dbc76a5a978d415610c35c5817f6a0163</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9P2zAUxy20CbqOP2CXKcddEp6d2k6EhITQNpCQdoCdn1zntXNJbWYnIP57HLWgjQMX29L3h-3PY-wLh4oDVyebau2oEvlYgahg0RywGYdWl0rr9gObQVZKyUEfsU8pbQCgETU_ZEdCtVqKup6x0_OUgnVmcMEXSxoeiXxhOvJha4o-2J1gfFdEl-6KsCoi2TFG8pY-s48r0yc63u9z9vvH99uLy_L618-ri_Pr0kothrKRArqlIl4vTCu0JSuNNqJtaykWS8qa1cpI0-qmW3CpONhaWtlwvVIm_6Ces7Nd7_243FJnyQ_R9Hgf3dbEJwzG4f-Kd39wHR5QykZBw3PBt31BDH9HSgNuXbLU98ZTGBPyRoBslcp05ozvrDaGlCKtXq_hgBN03GCGjhN0BIEZes58_fd9r4kXytlwujNQpvTgKGKybiLYuUxzwC64d-vP3qRt77yzpr-jJ0qbMEaf8SPHlAN4M019GjpXACKv9TOVZqcQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1820596682</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Pohl, Heiko, MD ; Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH ; Mott, Leila A., MS ; Ahnen, Dennis J., MD ; Burke, Carol A., MD ; Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD ; Bresalier, Robert S., MD ; Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD ; Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH ; Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH ; Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</creator><creatorcontrib>Pohl, Heiko, MD ; Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH ; Mott, Leila A., MS ; Ahnen, Dennis J., MD ; Burke, Carol A., MD ; Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD ; Bresalier, Robert S., MD ; Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD ; Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH ; Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH ; Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</creatorcontrib><description>Background and Aims The biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline colonoscopy. Methods Data were extracted from 3 adenoma prevention trials (n = 2430). Participants had at least 1 adenoma at baseline colonoscopy and underwent subsequent surveillance colonoscopy, at which time metachronous adenomas could be detected. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for metachronous adenomas by location of the baseline lesion and considered the impact of advanced neoplasia and multiplicity. Results At baseline, 522 patients (21.5%) had adenomas only in the proximal colon, 1266 patients (52.1%) had adenomas only in the distal colorectum, and 642 (26.4%) had adenomas in both regions. Overall, 877 patients (36.5%) had metachronous adenomas during the follow-up period. Those with only proximal adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous adenomas compared with patients with only distal adenomas (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01–1.35). A greater proximal risk was found after restricting the analysis to patients with multiple proximal adenomas versus multiple distal adenomas (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10–1.67). The risk of recurrent adenomas on the same side was 48% higher for patients with only proximal adenomas at baseline compared with those with only distal adenomas at baseline (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22–1.80). Conclusions Patients with proximal adenomas only have a modestly greater risk of adenoma recurrence than patients with adenomas limited to the distal colon, and have a greater likelihood of adenoma recurrence on the same side compared with patients with distal adenomas. This observation suggests that biological factors may differentially affect neoplasia growth across the colon.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-5107</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.048</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26975233</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adenoma - surgery ; Aged ; Colon - pathology ; Colonic Neoplasms - surgery ; Colonoscopy ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastroenterology and Hepatology ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - epidemiology ; Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - surgery ; Neoplasms, Second Primary - epidemiology ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Rectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Rectum - pathology ; Risk Factors</subject><ispartof>Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2016-10, Vol.84 (4), p.709-716</ispartof><rights>2016</rights><rights>Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-8520db6e134a927cec5a7a2993524be0dbc76a5a978d415610c35c5817f6a0163</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-8520db6e134a927cec5a7a2993524be0dbc76a5a978d415610c35c5817f6a0163</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9453-0587</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.048$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26975233$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pohl, Heiko, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mott, Leila A., MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahnen, Dennis J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burke, Carol A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bresalier, Robert S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</creatorcontrib><title>Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence</title><title>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</title><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><description>Background and Aims The biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline colonoscopy. Methods Data were extracted from 3 adenoma prevention trials (n = 2430). Participants had at least 1 adenoma at baseline colonoscopy and underwent subsequent surveillance colonoscopy, at which time metachronous adenomas could be detected. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for metachronous adenomas by location of the baseline lesion and considered the impact of advanced neoplasia and multiplicity. Results At baseline, 522 patients (21.5%) had adenomas only in the proximal colon, 1266 patients (52.1%) had adenomas only in the distal colorectum, and 642 (26.4%) had adenomas in both regions. Overall, 877 patients (36.5%) had metachronous adenomas during the follow-up period. Those with only proximal adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous adenomas compared with patients with only distal adenomas (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01–1.35). A greater proximal risk was found after restricting the analysis to patients with multiple proximal adenomas versus multiple distal adenomas (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10–1.67). The risk of recurrent adenomas on the same side was 48% higher for patients with only proximal adenomas at baseline compared with those with only distal adenomas at baseline (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22–1.80). Conclusions Patients with proximal adenomas only have a modestly greater risk of adenoma recurrence than patients with adenomas limited to the distal colon, and have a greater likelihood of adenoma recurrence on the same side compared with patients with distal adenomas. This observation suggests that biological factors may differentially affect neoplasia growth across the colon.</description><subject>Adenoma - surgery</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Colon - pathology</subject><subject>Colonic Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multicenter Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - epidemiology</subject><subject>Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - surgery</subject><subject>Neoplasms, Second Primary - epidemiology</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Rectum - pathology</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><issn>0016-5107</issn><issn>1097-6779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9P2zAUxy20CbqOP2CXKcddEp6d2k6EhITQNpCQdoCdn1zntXNJbWYnIP57HLWgjQMX29L3h-3PY-wLh4oDVyebau2oEvlYgahg0RywGYdWl0rr9gObQVZKyUEfsU8pbQCgETU_ZEdCtVqKup6x0_OUgnVmcMEXSxoeiXxhOvJha4o-2J1gfFdEl-6KsCoi2TFG8pY-s48r0yc63u9z9vvH99uLy_L618-ri_Pr0kothrKRArqlIl4vTCu0JSuNNqJtaykWS8qa1cpI0-qmW3CpONhaWtlwvVIm_6Ces7Nd7_243FJnyQ_R9Hgf3dbEJwzG4f-Kd39wHR5QykZBw3PBt31BDH9HSgNuXbLU98ZTGBPyRoBslcp05ozvrDaGlCKtXq_hgBN03GCGjhN0BIEZes58_fd9r4kXytlwujNQpvTgKGKybiLYuUxzwC64d-vP3qRt77yzpr-jJ0qbMEaf8SPHlAN4M019GjpXACKv9TOVZqcQ</recordid><startdate>20161001</startdate><enddate>20161001</enddate><creator>Pohl, Heiko, MD</creator><creator>Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH</creator><creator>Mott, Leila A., MS</creator><creator>Ahnen, Dennis J., MD</creator><creator>Burke, Carol A., MD</creator><creator>Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD</creator><creator>Bresalier, Robert S., MD</creator><creator>Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD</creator><creator>Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH</creator><creator>Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH</creator><creator>Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9453-0587</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20161001</creationdate><title>Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence</title><author>Pohl, Heiko, MD ; Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH ; Mott, Leila A., MS ; Ahnen, Dennis J., MD ; Burke, Carol A., MD ; Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD ; Bresalier, Robert S., MD ; Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD ; Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH ; Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH ; Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-8520db6e134a927cec5a7a2993524be0dbc76a5a978d415610c35c5817f6a0163</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adenoma - surgery</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Colon - pathology</topic><topic>Colonic Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multicenter Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - epidemiology</topic><topic>Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - surgery</topic><topic>Neoplasms, Second Primary - epidemiology</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Rectum - pathology</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pohl, Heiko, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mott, Leila A., MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahnen, Dennis J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burke, Carol A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bresalier, Robert S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pohl, Heiko, MD</au><au>Robertson, Douglas J., MD, MPH</au><au>Mott, Leila A., MS</au><au>Ahnen, Dennis J., MD</au><au>Burke, Carol A., MD</au><au>Barry, Elizabeth L., PhD</au><au>Bresalier, Robert S., MD</au><au>Figueiredo, Jane C., PhD</au><au>Shaukat, Aasma, MD, MPH</au><au>Sandler, Robert S., MD, MPH</au><au>Baron, John A., MD, MS, MSc</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence</atitle><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><date>2016-10-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>84</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>709</spage><epage>716</epage><pages>709-716</pages><issn>0016-5107</issn><eissn>1097-6779</eissn><abstract>Background and Aims The biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline colonoscopy. Methods Data were extracted from 3 adenoma prevention trials (n = 2430). Participants had at least 1 adenoma at baseline colonoscopy and underwent subsequent surveillance colonoscopy, at which time metachronous adenomas could be detected. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for metachronous adenomas by location of the baseline lesion and considered the impact of advanced neoplasia and multiplicity. Results At baseline, 522 patients (21.5%) had adenomas only in the proximal colon, 1266 patients (52.1%) had adenomas only in the distal colorectum, and 642 (26.4%) had adenomas in both regions. Overall, 877 patients (36.5%) had metachronous adenomas during the follow-up period. Those with only proximal adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous adenomas compared with patients with only distal adenomas (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01–1.35). A greater proximal risk was found after restricting the analysis to patients with multiple proximal adenomas versus multiple distal adenomas (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10–1.67). The risk of recurrent adenomas on the same side was 48% higher for patients with only proximal adenomas at baseline compared with those with only distal adenomas at baseline (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22–1.80). Conclusions Patients with proximal adenomas only have a modestly greater risk of adenoma recurrence than patients with adenomas limited to the distal colon, and have a greater likelihood of adenoma recurrence on the same side compared with patients with distal adenomas. This observation suggests that biological factors may differentially affect neoplasia growth across the colon.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>26975233</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.048</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9453-0587</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0016-5107 |
ispartof | Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2016-10, Vol.84 (4), p.709-716 |
issn | 0016-5107 1097-6779 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5586081 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Adenoma - surgery Aged Colon - pathology Colonic Neoplasms - surgery Colonoscopy Female Follow-Up Studies Gastroenterology and Hepatology Humans Male Middle Aged Multicenter Studies as Topic Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - epidemiology Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - surgery Neoplasms, Second Primary - epidemiology Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Rectal Neoplasms - surgery Rectum - pathology Risk Factors |
title | Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T13%3A30%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Association%20between%20adenoma%20location%20and%20risk%20of%20recurrence&rft.jtitle=Gastrointestinal%20endoscopy&rft.au=Pohl,%20Heiko,%20MD&rft.date=2016-10-01&rft.volume=84&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=709&rft.epage=716&rft.pages=709-716&rft.issn=0016-5107&rft.eissn=1097-6779&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.048&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1820596682%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1820596682&rft_id=info:pmid/26975233&rft_els_id=S0016510716002716&rfr_iscdi=true |